Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 22:32:00 -
[31]
Just sit down and think for a minute how engagements work.
Someone usually engages when he thinks he has good odds of winning. He won't if he doesn't. The side that is being engaged will most often try to disengage, because the engaging side probably has better odds of winning (otherwise he would not have engaged in the first place). Since disengaging (running) is also fairly easy, most actual fights come about in the following way:
1. Attacking party made a mistake in estimating the odds 2. Defending party acts as bait (and thus doesn't run) and the attacking party could not see reinforcements (they were in the next system over for example) 3. Defending party made a mistake in estimating the odds (and didn't disengage in time) 4. Defending party was not paying attention (surprised). 5. The attacking party doesn't mind engaging with poor odds (he's dying for a fight)
In EVE, the attacking party rarely engages with poor odds: he has the information gathering tools to avoid such, same goes for the defender. Remove those information gathering tools, and suddenly we see less one-sided fights, because more mistakes will be made.
With local if there are 10 people on one side, and 5 on the other, the first will try to engage, the others will try to disengage. Odds are that no fight will take place. The 10 may try to bait the 5, but it usually won't succeed, since the 5 now there is backup nearby. However, with neither party knowing what the exact enemy strength is, the 5 might engage the bait, and get jumped. Thus creating a fight that would not have happened in the first place. Of course, the 10 might feel nervous themselves, because those 5 might be just bait for another larger group....
Currently I've had many situations with 6 friendlies and 6 hostiles in local. I knew 3 friendlies were afk, but didn't know how many hostiles were active. Obviously nobody of us engaged figuring 3 to 6 odds were too poor. Possibly the enemy was in the same situations, the info from local effectively paralyzing the situations. Less information means more mistakes, more mistakes mean more battles. More mistakes mean more even-sided battles.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Soporo
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 22:32:00 -
[32]
Thanks, Kieron, I think most of us know that, we are just arguing the concept.
|
AstroPhobic
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 22:48:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Soporo
Quote: And you have a twenty man security force the hunter has no idea is there. Cowboy up and fight back.
I do? The thing is, as you well know, a prat appears out of nowhere in a belt Op, bam the miners are dead. Period. Even being aligned in a Ret is no guarantee, its just too damn slow. So the miners die, which is all you want really, you then warp out and disapear.
I assume you think everyone can have 5-10 guys sitting in a belt at EACH belt for each op, just waiting to defend? Not hardly.
It's just a stupid idea, admit it, it would ONLY help Prats and nerf EVERYONE else.
But maybe it would drive down Zyd prices and rebalance the market.
'Cause I really think for the good of the market. Yeah....
|
Riley Craven
Caldari Copacetic Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 22:54:00 -
[34]
I would support not having local only if it applied to hub systems like jita... Dear god the spam in that channel is horrific.
|
Revolution Rising
Minmatar Venture Research and Resources
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 22:58:00 -
[35]
Just create a module that only fits on frigate class ships that give information about system gate activity.
But I think something like a BS already has enough advatage against 80% of the other non-capital ships in the game, same with t2 cruisers, recon etc... frigs or covert ops would be handy to have around in 0.0 to tell who was coming into system. People would be less happy to run their BS around all day every day... hmmm... sounds ok to me!
RR
CEO Venture Research and Resources. VRR Homepage |
Maxine Blade
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 23:03:00 -
[36]
What if there were several changes? Here are some examples that can bring some balance (think submarine warfare).
- Module created that detects when someone does a Directional Scan. The Prey can mount these and are notified if Directional Scanning or probing is occurring (almost like passive sonar detecting active sonar pings) - Make ECCM impact Directional Scanning. Today, Directional Scanning always works. Add something that makes Directional Scanning less effective is someone has ECCM
This will make people fit their ships to protect against probing/scanning. Also, pirates can still maintain stealth if they just want to belt hop, but not scan. Takes more effort, but that's the price of not using directional scanning.
Think of submarines.
|
Revolution Rising
Minmatar Venture Research and Resources
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 23:16:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Revolution Rising on 20/03/2007 23:12:39 People are also forgetting one thing. The pirate has to search every. single. belt. in every. single. system. in order to find someone to gank.
RR
CEO Venture Research and Resources. VRR Homepage |
Sever Aldaria
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 23:23:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Maxine Blade What if there were several changes? Here are some examples that can bring some balance (think submarine warfare).
- Module created that detects when someone does a Directional Scan. The Prey can mount these and are notified if Directional Scanning or probing is occurring (almost like passive sonar detecting active sonar pings) - Make ECCM impact Directional Scanning. Today, Directional Scanning always works. Add something that makes Directional Scanning less effective is someone has ECCM
This will make people fit their ships to protect against probing/scanning. Also, pirates can still maintain stealth if they just want to belt hop, but not scan. Takes more effort, but that's the price of not using directional scanning.
Think of submarines.
Hmm... so something like being pinged by sonar. That sounds pretty interesting. I think it would have too much lag involved though imagine 3 people spamming the scan button. (PIPIPIPIPIPIPIPIPING!!) Unless you put a "refire" time for directional scan but... eh...
[green]Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further d |
Vmir Gallahasen
Gallente Omniscient Order Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2007.03.20 23:45:00 -
[39]
I think it's odd that people who are against removing local cite the "attacker gets all the advantage" reason. My reason for removing local is "defender gets all the advantage". Don't try and deny it, you can rat or mine in 100% safety in 0.0 if you're paying attention currently. A hostile jumps into system? You instantly warp out to a safe/station, cloak or log. The attacker(s) has no chance at all, despite having travelled a good long ways and avoiding the various gank blobs that usually form to chase him/her/them. Even if the attacker(s) are packing probes, your ship will disappear too quickly to be pinpointed.
It definitely needs a change, even if it's less than complete removal of local.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:01:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen I think it's odd that people who are against removing local cite the "attacker gets all the advantage" reason. My reason for removing local is "defender gets all the advantage". Don't try and deny it, you can rat or mine in 100% safety in 0.0 if you're paying attention currently. A hostile jumps into system? You instantly warp out to a safe/station, cloak or log. The attacker(s) has no chance at all, despite having travelled a good long ways and avoiding the various gank blobs that usually form to chase him/her/them. Even if the attacker(s) are packing probes, your ship will disappear too quickly to be pinpointed.
It definitely needs a change, even if it's less than complete removal of local.
TBH, I agree. I'm not all that happy with local as it is right now, but we can't *just* remove it, or we'll be unbalancing it even more in the other direction (see my earlier reply).
What we need is local removing, AND REPLACING with something new and nifty.
Simplest idea ever might be this- remove the player list from local, but put in a "gate activation" message. You won't know who it is. You won''t know whether they were coming or going. All it'd do is prompt people in system to check their scanners (preventing the "I must spam my scanner 23/7" problem).
Not the best idea ever, but its at least a little better than the "remove local completely" cries. --------
|
|
Kappas.
Galaxy Punks Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:02:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen I think it's odd that people who are against removing local cite the "attacker gets all the advantage" reason. My reason for removing local is "defender gets all the advantage". Don't try and deny it, you can rat or mine in 100% safety in 0.0 if you're paying attention currently. A hostile jumps into system? You instantly warp out to a safe/station, cloak or log. The attacker(s) has no chance at all, despite having travelled a good long ways and avoiding the various gank blobs that usually form to chase him/her/them. Even if the attacker(s) are packing probes, your ship will disappear too quickly to be pinpointed.
It definitely needs a change, even if it's less than complete removal of local.
So you want to go into a system, with say, 20-30 belts, and go through each and every one to discover there's no-one else in the system?
|
Revolution Rising
Minmatar Venture Research and Resources
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:06:00 -
[42]
Yeah I've been watching a couple of other MMO's really closely that are just going into BETA and such... One thing I notice on the boards for those MMO's is the juggle between "features" and "realism". Local has no realistic quality to it. It's far too IRCish for me - and thus detracts from the actual "authentic atmosphere" quality of the game.
It is the big thing missing in EVE imho removing local would help a lot.
RR.
CEO Venture Research and Resources. VRR Homepage |
Minerma
EVE corporation 501
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:11:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Revolution Rising Yeah I've been watching a couple of other MMO's really closely that are just going into BETA and such... One thing I notice on the boards for those MMO's is the juggle between "features" and "realism". Local has no realistic quality to it. It's far too IRCish for me - and thus detracts from the actual "authentic atmosphere" quality of the game.
It is the big thing missing in EVE imho removing local would help a lot.
RR.
Why dont you minimise your local chat if it ruins your realistic gameplay ??
|
Humpalot
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:17:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Revolution Rising Yeah I've been watching a couple of other MMO's really closely that are just going into BETA and such... One thing I notice on the boards for those MMO's is the juggle between "features" and "realism". Local has no realistic quality to it. It's far too IRCish for me - and thus detracts from the actual "authentic atmosphere" quality of the game.
It is the big thing missing in EVE imho removing local would help a lot.
RR.
Well, from an RP perspective Local is easily enough accounted for. The only way to enter and leave a system is via a jump gate. The jump gates broadcast a signal to all in the local area on who comes and goes.
Ok, cap ships that jump themselves are a dent in that idea. I suppose you could say a jump gate is attuned to jump signatures and queries the incoming ship for its registration and for whatever reason all ships comply with this.
*shrug*...I dunno...I try...
|
Kellaen
Gallente Teeth Of The Hydra
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:18:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Sever Aldaria
Originally by: SonOTassadar Edited by: SonOTassadar on 20/03/2007 20:46:43
Originally by: Skraeling Shortbus shrug its hardly a "good" thing now as the balance is completely shifted to the hunter and there is nothing for the hunted.
Both hunter and hunted have the same tools to find each other. How has the balance shifted?
Personally, I think no local is a good thing, but having something to make watching your back an easier, less remedial task would be good, like being able to track residual warp destinations (Like a dog following a scent) would be great.
He's got a point. Hunter has to scan for prey but prey can do the same thing. Also, hunters can be hunted by other hunters easier. Makes the game more real and exciting imo.
More real and more exciting? I can see more exciting if you're a ganker, but not if you're a gankee. I guess if your idea of more exciting is trying to do what you're doing and having to spam scan every 5 seconds with no local then I want no part of that excitement.
No local in the current climate is a disaster, and harbors huge favor to a ganker then the gankee. Put in some active scanning radar type ship system first and then you can have no-local. |
Manfred Doomhammer
Caldari ShadowTec Inc. Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:30:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Manfred Doomhammer on 21/03/2007 00:26:46 bs... local favors the defender atm.. and heavily at it...
now, if youre trying to hunt donw pirates, youre exactly in the same position as they are with miners.. you only get the dumb and/or lazy....
all others run the second your hitsquad enters local...
theres allways 2 sides of the coin, and for every oh so poor miner that wont get away theres at least a pirate bastard that would meet his fate if local is gone. stop with that "we poor carebears" emo trip allready, it goes both ways ----
Manfred Doomhammer CEO ShadowTec Inc.
|
Salvis Tallan
Gallente The Shadow Order Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:34:00 -
[47]
What did I do when local was out? I flew an iteron 5 through the forge, low sec, and 0.0 about 27 jumps. My fitting? Salvager in the high, MWD, and 2 overdrive injectors cause that was all I had in the station (besides the few mil mexallon I found myself hauling). My alliance is also at war with privateers. If pirates want to kill their own profession, its fine by me. If i was serious and trying to survive, Id have a cloak and my scanner. Once i see them 14 AU out, bam, cloaked till they leave. Also, I will be investing heavily in scan probes to sell in border systems. ------
|
Vitelius
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:37:00 -
[48]
I don't know if it has been brought up already in this thread but how about implementing local only as numbers - no names or faces. If someone talks, then his name and face are revealed in the chat, otherwise not. This would mean that you could keep tabs on how many are in the system but wouldn't know their identity, which would bring a lot more excitement into gameplay. This would leave carebears happy and PvP could get a bit more interesting as well.
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:38:00 -
[49]
Modify the Engagement Grid to be 15 au in radius.
Remove the Overview and Scanner.
Introduce the Tactial Sensor Readout (TSR) that takes the form of a sphere representing the Engagement Grid. Add in various manipulation tools, such as zoom, Object Analysis, Long Range Scans (>1au), Short Range Scans (<1au), Field Dispersion Mode (super short range anti cloak ping that blinds you to normal mode readings), Sensor Disruption Mode (essentially a jamming mode that both blinds you and all ships within range of the effect with a diminishing 'falloff' (thus making it possible to triangulate the source and/or be simply immune to the effect if your sensor strength is sufficient to overcome it)).
The traditional Targeting Computer would remain, but it could lock at greater ranges (lock speed would be directly inverse to lock range, no double boosting, a boost to one would nerf the other, the nerfs having no stacking penalty).
Change warp speeds so that 1 au/s is the 'standard' (Cruisers, BSes, BCs), fastest ships going 2 au/s. Slowest going 0.2 au/s (I am aware that this would make Freighters take nearly 15 mins to cross some systems).
Remove the Stargate System and implement Star Jumps (borrowing my SRS idea that lets you 'jump' to a star you can lock on to).
You can warp to a ship you are scanning, and you can attempt to intercept a ship in warp (if you can speed match or faster), but cant actually pull it out of warp, and it can see you as well (assuming no cloaks).
This is a sampling of what I envision Eve 2 to be anyway...since I doubt CCP plans to make Eve itself this good lol (till a sci-fi mmo done right comes anyway). _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Star Commander |
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 00:51:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Patch86
What we need is local removing, AND REPLACING with something new and nifty.
Simplest idea ever might be this- remove the player list from local, but put in a "gate activation" message. You won't know who it is. You won''t know whether they were coming or going. All it'd do is prompt people in system to check their scanners (preventing the "I must spam my scanner 23/7" problem).
Not the best idea ever, but its at least a little better than the "remove local completely" cries.
Better yet, imo, just have a Local count. The rest of Local intel gathering shunt over to an enhanced directional scanner and probe system. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
|
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Minmatar Ship Construction Services
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 01:07:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Maxine Blade What if there were several changes? Here are some examples that can bring some balance (think submarine warfare).
- Module created that detects when someone does a Directional Scan. The Prey can mount these and are notified if Directional Scanning or probing is occurring (almost like passive sonar detecting active sonar pings) - Make ECCM impact Directional Scanning. Today, Directional Scanning always works. Add something that makes Directional Scanning less effective is someone has ECCM
This will make people fit their ships to protect against probing/scanning. Also, pirates can still maintain stealth if they just want to belt hop, but not scan. Takes more effort, but that's the price of not using directional scanning.
Think of submarines.
I'm not generally in favor of removing local, as it gives even more advantage to the side of the conflict that really has most of the advantages already. That having been said, Maxine has some good ideas. Here's my twist on them:
1) Remove player ships from directional scans entirely. The only way to gain information on ships in the vicinity is to use probes. (Note that this incorporates Maxine's second idea, since ship probing already takes sensor strength into account.)
2) Probes are "loud"; everyone within the probe radius will get a notification of some sort that a probe has been activated, upon activation (but little more information than this). Gate activations should also generate a similar warning system-wide, including which gate was activated, and whether the activation was incoming or outgoing. These notifications should probably be found on a new tab in the scanner (to cut down on messages when in high-traffic systems or for players who don't care).
3) There might be value to adding an additional module (similar to a passive sonar) that grants additional information. For example, it might extend the notification to system-wide notification of probe attempts, and/or puts the location of the probe on the system map, and/or allows the owner to 'analyze' using his opponent's probe (possibly giving the owner information on the prober's location, unless the prober was careful to stay outside of the probe region).
4) Local in low-sec and 0.0 is modified to provide the player with a choice of settings: "broadcast" (this is equivalent to the current setting, causing the player info to be displayed in local), "fly colors" (the player shows up in local as an unidentifed member of his corporation/alliance), or "run silent" (the player does not show up in local). Anyone who posts in local would be switched to the "broadcast" setting. Note that all players would remain on broadcast in high-sec (due to CONCORD monitoring).
The above package gives *alert* players at least minimal warning of a potential hostile presence -- though if the hunter was running silent, they might not know if the hunter was a friend or foe. It also gives the hunter a greater degree of anonymity. -- Becq Starforged proprietor of Starforge Industries, a subsidiary of Minmatar Ship Construction Services
At Starforge Industries, the world of tomorrow is being blown apart today! |
mazzilliu
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 01:18:00 -
[52]
EASY fix: remove local, show standings on the scanner, make the scanner autoupdate every minute or so
THE RUG IS TOO FULL |
Helix Fluxx
Caldari Contempo Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 01:23:00 -
[53]
I'm not at all happy with the idea of getting rid of local so that the gankers can get their easy mode. There is no need to remove it. I mean it's pretty difficult to ransom your target without local, and it takes twice as many mouse clicks to get to start a convo with the guy to ransom him, when this is something you want to be doing as quickly as possible.
I'm not a pirate, but if I was I'd be ****ed if they took away my means of quickly communicating with targets.
Aside from that, how would anyone be able to either a) make the dumb mistake of typing what's meant to go in gang chat in local, or b) smacktalk like a retarded 4 year old?
Think about it, you actually need local more than you think you do.
Apologies if this has been covered already, I just plain couldn't be arsed to read through the "get rid of local" tripe I've been seeing since the patch bugged out.
|
WarMongeer
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 01:31:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Lorth Its not like local is the miner/npc'rs only option to defend against the hunter.
There's a whole host of easy to do, no work required, hardly any thought involved, methodes to avoid someone, even if they don't show up in local. Mine away from the belt marker, use the friggen scanner your self, where a stab or two your just mining, stay alinged when your busy with rats, etc etc. Frankly with local removed, its still much harder capture someone on the ball, then it is to avoid capture.
That's the first pile of total bs I've seen anyone from the MC post. Your targets are static (they will always be at the belts) You're mobile, armed to the teeth, and have even more of a clear advantage with local removed. If we put stabs on it slows the mining process even more. Mine away from the belt marker? We do that already. It doesn't really matter with ships that will go 5k+/sec.
Local is the only defense I use when mining.
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 01:38:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Helix Fluxx I'm not at all happy with the idea of getting rid of local so that the gankers can get their easy mode.
Actually, Local is what makes it extremely easy to find targets. Remember, its not always just about location...sometimes the target itself matters (Age, etc).
Quote: There is no need to remove it.
There is no need to not remove it.
Quote: I mean it's pretty difficult to ransom your target without local, and it takes twice as many mouse clicks to get to start a convo with the guy to ransom him, when this is something you want to be doing as quickly as possible.
Why would anyone ransom in local? That's like taking a sign and painting, IM HERE on it.
Quote: I'm not a pirate, but if I was I'd be ****ed if they took away my means of quickly communicating with targets.
Er...if communication is desired, then that is another point in favor of the defender...pirate has to find you to talk to you.
Quote: Aside from that, how would anyone be able to either a) make the dumb mistake of typing what's meant to go in gang chat in local, or b) smacktalk like a retarded 4 year old?
The channel would still be there...it just wouldnt have a memberlist.
Quote: Think about it, you actually need local more than you think you do.
There has never been an occasion in the 3 years of my playing Eve where seeing who is or is not in Local has affected my ability or desire to communicate. I have private channels for a reason...and an Eve Mail Inbox...if I want to talk to you...you are probably in one of them. If not...talking in Local isnt out of the question.
Quote: Apologies if this has been covered already, I just plain couldn't be arsed to read through the "get rid of local" tripe I've been seeing since the patch bugged out.
The key is to make the distinction that is critical to the issue:
Local's current form being 'killed' does not necessarily mean Local will be removed or not used. I'd be fine with a removal of the memberlist. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Star Commander |
Pac SubCom
A.W.M Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 02:33:00 -
[56]
"No local" would bring the bookmarks back, only they wouldn't be 12km behind the gate, but 2000km before the gate. At every gate of the route. What was that about the need for speed? --------------- ∞ TQFE
|
Farrellus Cameron
Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 02:52:00 -
[57]
I'm not opposed to revamping the system. However, I believe complete removal would merely benefit gankers and deter solo/small groups from going into 0.0. You need to give people some warning, some ability to realize they are about to enter an intercourse storm. There may be some arguments about realism, but the fact is that it is sci-fi and it is a game. You have to balance realism, enjoyment, and practicalities.
Now, if they introduce some creative ways of checking solarsystems for possible hostile activity, maybe even while not being in the specific system, but not necessarily giving you specific numbers or specific pilot names/standing designations, that would be a good counterpoint.
Some system that would remove the need to have alts or a scout sitting in a system doing nothing for hours upon hours and just keeping an eye on local for possible incoming fleets would be nice. Requiring that in order to not get surprise attacked is just ridiculous. If EVE was real, someone would've come up with some sort of automated alert system for monitoring pipe systems for hostiles, plain and simple. ----------------------------------------------------
|
Parhelion
Thundercats RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 03:04:00 -
[58]
My 2c.
If local is removed, then it should work this way:
- If you type something in local, your name appears in the list so people will know you're there - If you don't type then you're not shown. - Need a 'proximity alert' module (high slot?) that will automatically scan within several AU. If ships are detected they show in overview or something, also maybe the pilot's name appears in your local chat?
The above means that if you want to talk to the locals (e.g. smak talk) then just chat in local but you give away the fact that you are in-system. The proximity module would held with getting back some intel on local space - removing local completely removes too much information that can't easily be replaced with probing/scanning atm.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 04:18:00 -
[59]
I was for the no local idea for 0.0 only when i continued to see pilots, log off, cloak or insta dock everytime someone jumped into the same system as them.
If local was to be nerfed then new scanning system is needed. Away to see how many ships are in local and not a name itself. But for now, keep local till they work that out cause nerfing local is a step sideways and not fowards
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.03.21 04:55:00 -
[60]
If local is removed an entirely new EWar and scanning system is needed, the essential guiding principle being that if it works in submarine warfare with sonar, it works in space with radar (the principles of the two are pretty much identical anyway + EVE spaceships act a lot more like subs due to the space-drag).
Now, I'm all for this, because it would be awesome and lead to an entirely new suite of EWar, logistics and use of space. Think chaff deployers, dummy signature beacons, passive triangulation from a ship scanning out other ships, environmental echoes and focussing (scan by diffracting around planets), indirect signal analysis (gathering the reflections of other sources to illuminate a target in space).
That would be an awesome system.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |